Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker174
Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. These two appeals are by the common defendant in two connected suits O. S. Nos. 50 and 53 of 1954 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Kozhikode and are directed against two similar orders passed by the court below, refusing his motion to set aside the award made in favour of the plaintiffs by the sole arbitrator in the case.2. O. S. 50 of 1954 was instituted by two plaintiffs, viz., (I) K. Kelukutty -- a partnership firm and (II) K. Kelukutty one of the; partners of the 1st plaintiff-firm. The plaintiffs in O. S. 53 of 1954 were similarly the firm of U.K. Sankunny and U.K. Sankunny a partner thereof. O. S. 50 of 1954 was for recovery of Rs. 6300 with interest and costs from the sole defendant C. C. Vulson, on the basis of a pro-note dated 27-5-1951 executed by the latter, in favour of the 2nd plaintiff, K. Kelukutty. O. S. 53 of 1954 was based on a pro-note, of same date and for same amount and executed by the same defendant but in favour of Sankunny the 2n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker36
M.S. Menon, J. 1. The only question that arises for consideration in this petition is whether O. S. No. 56 of 1957 of the Ernakulam Munsiff's Court has to be stayed under Section 4 of the Kerala Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act, 1957 (Act I of 1957) or not.2. The suit seeks the recovery of certain arrears of michavarom alleged to be due under a kanom demise. Paragraph 1 of the plaint speaks of the demise as follows :(Quotation in Malayalam omitted --Ed.) The arrears claimed cover a period of 12 years 1120 M.E. to 1131 M.E. (both years inclusive).3. The lower court dealt with the contention that the suit should be stayed as follows :'The suit is for arrears of michavarom. It is argued for the plaintiff that the claim is for michavarom and not for pattom and that therefore Act 1/57 is not applicable. Act I is applicable to kanapattom also. This suit is therefore stayed under Act 1/57'.4. The revision petition states the contentions of the petitioner (Plaintiff) in the following terms :'T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker169
Sankaran, J. 1. Plaintiffs in O. S. No. 94 of 1954 on the file of the Sub-Court at Attingal have preferred this appeal against the decree dismissing the suit. Originally there were 41 plaintiffs of whom the 41st plaintiff died and her heirs were impleaded as additional plaintiffs 42 and 43. These plaintiffs and the defendants in the suit are members of one and the same tarwad consisting of 4 thavazhies. These parties are Ezhavas and are governed by the Travancore Ezhava Act, Act III of 1100. Plaintiffs' suit is for partition of the common tarwad properties on a per capita basis and for recovery of the share due to the plaintiffs' branch.The majority of the members in the plaintiffs' branch have figured as plaintiffs' and the remaining members are included in the party array among defendants. On the date of the suit the total number of members in the tarwad is stated to be 105, of which 71 members belonged to the plaintiffs' branch. On this basis, plaintiffs have claimed for their branc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker180
Sankaran, J.1. The dispute as to the right to execute the decree in O. S. 195/1950 on the file of the Nedumangad Munsiffs Court has given rise to this Second Appeal. The properties involved in the suit belonged to the original plaintiff and, as the owner of the equity of redemption of these properties, he instituted the suit for redeeming the properties from the defendant on payment of the redemption price due to the defendant. During the pendency of that suit, the plaintiff assigned all his rights in the equity of redemption of the properties, in favour of the appellant and directed him to get recovery of possession of the properties from the defendant on payment of the redemption price that may be found to be due to them.There was also a direction in the deed of assignment that the assignee may get himself impleaded as additional 2nd plaintiff in the suit' and carry on further proceedings towards redemption of the mortgage and recovery of possession of the properties. However, the as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker88; 1959CriLJ457
G. Kumara Pillai, J. 1. The accused in Criminal Case No. 2 of 1957 of the court of the Special Judge (Sessions Judge), Trivandrum, who has been convicted under Section 161, I. P. C. and Section 5(i)(d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Central Act 2 of 1947) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and pay a fine of Rs. 50/-in default of payment of which he Js to undergo imprisonment for a further term of two weeks, is the appellant in this case. The charge against him was that, being a public servant, he received, at about 5-30 p.m., on 23-8-1956, an illegal gratification of Rs. 7 from P. W. 2, a forwarding agent at Trichur, for booking 57 bags of wet skins which the latter had to send by railway from Trichur.2. The prosecution case is as follows: The accused was one of the Assistant Goods Clerks of the Trichur Goods Shed of the Southern Railway. On 31-1-1956 P. W. 2, who used to send goods by railway from Trichur, sent a petition, Ex. P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker352a
ORDERVaradaraja Iyengar, J.1. This revision is by the defendant, against an interlocutory Order of the court below, holding that the set off claimed by him cannot be gone into.2. The suit was for recovery of the principal of Rs. 300/- and interest at 12 per cent thereon due on a promissory note dated 18-7-1953 and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant in his written statement admitted the execution of the promissory note and his liability for the principal amount but set up contemporaneous agreement that the interest provision in the promissory note was not intended to be enforced. He also put forward a claim to set off an amount of Rs. 204-5-7 being the balance of advances alleged to bave been made by him UD to 11-9-1956 for conduct of certain suits of the plaintiff and at his request and produced three books of account maintained by him in that connection.He pleaded further that the plaintiff had agreed to have the principal amount under the promissory n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker98; 1959CriLJ463
K. Sankaran, J.1. The State has preferred this appeal against the acquittal of the accused in C. C. No. 1303/1957 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate's court at Kozhikode. The charge against the accused was that lie was in illegal possession of about 3/4 lb. of ganja. On getting information that the accused was in possession of such, a contraband article, Pw. 1, the Sub Inspector of Police at Kozhikode, conducted a search of the-house of the accused where the article was alleged to have been kept, at about 6.15 p.m. on 10-8-1957 and he recovered the article which has been proved and marked as M. O. 2 series of packets. The box in which these packets were kept was also recovered and the same has been marked as M. O. 1. The search list prepared at the time of recovery of M. Os. 1 and 2 has been marked as Ext. P2. Pws. 1 and 2 are the witnesses who have given evidence in support of the search evidenced by Ext. P2. Charge was laid against the accused under Section 4(1)(a) of the Madras Prohi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker235
Varadaraja Iyengar, J. 1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs in a suit for reopening a prior partition in their tarwad, on grounds of its invalidity and fraud and unfairness otherwise, and for fresh partition. The suit was dismissed by the court below in toto and hence this appeal. There is also a cross objection by certain members of the tarwad, forming the group of defendants 6, 16, 17 and 18. 2. We are concerned in this appeal with only one of the grounds put forward in the court below for invalidating the prior partition arrangement to which all the majors for the time being were parties and evidenced by Ext. M., that is to say, that the 1st plaintiff, who according to the plaintiffs was in fact a major, was dealt with as a minor under Ext. M. The fraud or unfairness which were said to have characterised Ext. M are for our purpose, confined to two transactions, viz (i) Ext. M release of a tarwad mortgage by the karanavan to two junior members, and (ii) execution of Ext. AD mortgage o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker237
Iyengar, J.1. This appeal is by the 2nd defendant against the judgment and decree in O. S. 57 of 1124 on the file of the District Court, Trivandrum allowing the suit.2. The plaint schedule properties 3 acres 57 cents in all, consist of portions of four survey numbers, 439/2, 439/1, 438/3 & 438/4 of the Nemom Pakuthy and held under Kandukrishi tenure. The plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest Padmanabha Panicker obtained, first a mortgage Ext. B dated 8-4-1115 and then a sale Ext. A dated 9-4-1118 of these properties. Alleging an attempt at trespass and consequent possibility of breach of peace, Padmanabha Panicker initiated proceedings under Section 145 of the Crl. P. C. before the First Class Magistrate, Neyyattinkara, as M. C. 16 of 1118 against the defendants 1 and 2 and others.These proceedings ultimately ended against him, vide Ext. M dated 26-1-1121. Subsequently on 28-4-1121 he field suit O. S. 67 of 1121 before the District Court of Trivandrum, against the defendants 1 and 2 and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker55; 1959CriLJ196
ORDER1. The Revision Petitioner is a lessee under the Village Officer who is the Receiver of the properties in a proceeding under Section 145 Criminal P. C. The term of the lease was one year which expired on 16-2-1957. The Receiver as well as one of the parties to the proceedings under Section 145 complained to the Magistrate that the Revision Petitioner had overcropped the cocoanuts in the properties during the currency of his lease and had thus caused damage. The Magistrate himself made a personal inspection of the properties and caused the bunches of cocoanuts in some of the trees, to be examined. He came to the conclusion that the petitioner had cropped cocoanuts in excess of those which could be cropped reasonably, and estimated the damage at an amount equal to the rent for one month. He held the petitioner to be liable to pay this amount. This order is sought to be revised in these proceedings. 2. The only ground on which I consider, that the matter can be reported to the High C...
Tag this Judgment!